4 ms·
The article concludes with suggesting people adopt the ‘soft no’. If the readers of this advice have issues with tension or anxiety (which is where the article
by AmericanChopper 6y ago
The article concludes with suggesting people adopt the ‘soft no’. If the readers of this advice have issues with tension or anxiety (which is where the article seems to be targeted), that could backfire quite badly. If a person is known for their people pleasing yeses, a soft no could just be sending the signal that the requester needs to apply more pressure. Saying no naturally involves some level of confrontation, skirting around the confrontation usually has the effect of also skirting around the delivery of the correct message.
- loopz 6y agoA "soft no" implies respectful environment. Current working and world conditions precludes this. If you find yourself working for an environment that has started positive transformation, a "soft no" will be heard. This is indicative of such an environment (a listening environment).
- AmericanChopper 6y agoI don’t think a soft vs hard no has much to do with respect (and I’m not sure why you think respectful working relationships aren’t possible). A hard no is just a definitive answer, and can be delivered as respectfully as you like. A soft no is usually an “I would if not for...”. Which some people will simply read as an invitation to remove blockers, or correct your mistaken prioritization decisions, so that you can deal with the more important issue of what they want you to do.
- loopz 6y ago--
- AmericanChopper 6y agoPreclude means to make impossible. I’ve also never in my rather long career noticed world affairs have a noticeable impact on my office culture. So I really do have no idea what you’re talking about.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- unishark 6y agoYes, this is bad advice for dealing with people who came to haggle and that think their work starts when you say "no", much less when decline weakly.